Mike Crapo

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. The clerk will report the pending bill.

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I thank Senator Bond and Senator Mikulski. As chairman of the Fisheries, Wildlife and Drinking Water Subcommittee, I rise today in strong opposition to the amendment to prevent the EPA from having the time necessary to produce a proper arsenic drinking water rule based on the available science. It is important to note that in 1996 this Congress directed the EPA to adopt a specific schedule to propose an arsenic standard to allow for a full year of public review and comments by scientific experts and then to implement a rule after taking into consideration those comments. That is what is at stake. It is important to follow up on what Senators Bond and Mikulski have said about what this amendment really does. It has been characterized as stopping the EPA from protecting us from arsenic problems. The reality is that all this amendment does is give the EPA up to an additional 6 months to complete its work. In fact, I am quite surprised to see this amendment today because the administration itself has said they do not have the ability to meet the statutory deadline, and they need this extra time to make sure the rule they adopt is scientifically justified and does not cause the immense damage to local small communities in rural areas that is of concern. We have held hearings on this issue in our subcommittee, and witness after witness has raised questions about whether the science is there to justify the direction in which the EPA is going. The EPA has acknowledged these questions. The EPA has said it needs time to further review the science, and the EPA has said it will take that time if we give it to them to do a good rule that will protect the country and yet not do damage to small communities in rural areas. It is also important to note that this amendment does not stop the EPA from acting at any time the EPA deems it is ready to act. If the EPA says it has the process finalized, it has the science understood and is ready to proceed, they can proceed tomorrow, they can proceed in November or December or January when the statutory deadline exists. Again, the EPA has told us they are not ready to do so and that they need this extra time. We believe they need the extra time because of the impending damage that could be caused to local communities across this country. As Senator Bond has said, there are communities and individual families who will see their water bills go up by hundreds of dollars. There are communities that probably will have to go off their systems because of this. The potential damage if we do not give the EPA the time to act properly and to review the comments is immense, and that is why I must oppose this amendment. I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. As the chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee knows, there is nothing that precludes the use Pittman- Robertson lands for dog field trials, and, that in fact, this is a legitimate use of these lands, provided that the field trials are consistent with the objectives of the Pittman-Robertson Act.

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise today in support of H.R. 3671, the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Programs Improvement Act of 2000. The bill we have before us today is the culmination of a bi-partisan, bi-cameral effort. I want to thank Chairman Bob Smith, Ranking Member Baucus, and Senator Boxer for their hard work and recognition of how important it was to pass this bill this year. I also thank Representative Don Young, Chairman of the House Resources Committee, for his efforts and investigation into the program. I think we have a bill that everyone can support. It will reduce Government waste and prevent misuse of funds, while enhancing the program. The federal aid program has been a conservation success story. This bill will ensure that this success continues by restoring accountability and responsibility to the program. Ultimately, this legislation will restore trust in the program, without affecting the effectiveness of the program. Senator Craig and I introduced the Senate version of this bill because there was a problem and America's hunters and fishermen needed trust returned to the administration of the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Programs. The bill we have before us today restricts the amount of money that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service can spend on administrative expenses, while clearly identifying authorized expenses. The bill also improves the program by funding a multi-state grant program, and ensuring that hunter education and shooting range programs are funded at the level hunters and shooting enthusiasts expect and deserve. These changes are good for the program, good for hunters, fishermen, and shooting enthusiasts, and are simply good government. Congressional investigations and a General Accounting Office audit of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service revealed that, contrary to existing law, money had been routinely diverted to administrative slush funds, withheld from states, and generally misused for purposes unrelated to either fisheries or wildlife conservation. In addition, the GAO called the Division of Federal Aid, ``if not the worst, one of the worst- managed programs we have encountered.'' As an avid outsdoorsman, I was particularly disturbed by this abuse. As a legislator, I am pleased to have an opportunity to prevent such abuses in the future. This bill reestablishes the trust between the hunters and anglers who pay the excise taxes and the Federal Government. It is an opportunity to repair a system that has been lauded as one of the nation's most successful conservation efforts. I hope my colleagues will join me in passing this bipartisan effort to restore accountability and responsibility to the Federal Aid programs and the Fish and Wildlife Service. I thank the Chair.

Mr. CRAPO. Multiple uses of public lands necessarily require the balancing of occasionally competing interests and objectives. The most appropriate parties to make decisions regarding wildlife habitat development and other uses and activities are state wildlife managers who are most familiar with site specific conditions, habitat needs, and the impact of sporting activities.

Mr. CRAPO. Concerns have been raised that Pittman-Robertson lands should not be used for field trials. As the Senator from New Hampshire knows, the sportsmen who pay this excise tax have varied interests-- they are hunters, field trialers, and shooting enthusiasts. The primary goal of the Pittman-Robertson Act is wildlife conservation, but it is also important that these lands support multiple uses.

Mr. CRAPO. I would like to engage the distinguished Senator from New Hampshire, Mr. Smith, in a colloquy regarding the Federal Aid bill and concerns that have been raised with respect to the use of Pittman- Robertson Act-acquired lands for dog field trials.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. I would like to engage the distinguished Senator from New Mexico, Mr. Domenici, in a colloquy regarding the Greater Yellowstone- Teton energy and transportation systems study and the International Centers for Environmental Safety, ICES.

Mr. CRAPO. As the chairman of the energy and water appropriations subcommittee knows, the pending conference report does not provide funds for the Yellowstone energy and transportation study. It is my understanding the Department of Energy supports this study and the Department may provide funds to support the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory's participation in this effort. If DOE makes a decision to provide funds for this study, would the chairman support that decision?

Mr. CRAPO. As the senior Senator from New Mexico knows, the ICES program was formed last year through a joint statement signed by Secretary Richardson and the Minister for Atomic Energy of the Russian Federation, Yevgeny Adamov. The centers were created to provide a mechanism for technical exchange and effective collaboration between the DOE and Minatom on matters of environmental safety in both countries. The U.S. Center is managed by the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory and Argonne National Laboratory. In Russia, the Ministry for Atomic Energy operates the Center in Moscow. Both work collaboratively to ensure overall ICES success in reducing environmental threats and costs.

Mr. CRAPO. I thank the Senator from New Mexico. hopi-western navajo water development study

Mr. CRAPO. Report language in the FY2001 Senate Energy and Water Development bill supports DOE's efforts to use the experience and expertise of scientists of the former Soviet Union to address waste management and environmental remediation challenges within the DOE complex. Isn't it also true that the centers are intended to facilitate international collaboration to address environmental and nuclear safety issues important to the national security?

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise today to commend the remarkable accomplishments of Charles Burton, an Idaho native and wrestler for the U.S. Olympic team. Charles was born in Ontario, Oregon and raised in Boise, Idaho. He graduated from Centennial High School in Boise, where he was a state champion, and Boise State University, where he won All-American status. In 1997, Charles won the University Freestyle National Championship and became a Pan American bronze medalist. Charles earned the number two spot on the US National team in 1999 after earning a silver medal at the world team trials in Seattle, Washington. He will wrestle in the Olympics from September 29th through October 1st. This Idahoan, and other devoted athletes, serve as reminders that through healthy competition, our challengers can inspire us to excel. They unify those of us who watch them through shared pride and passion. Their victories leave our souls soaring high and our feet light. In times of defeat, we are humbled by the fact that there is more work to be done to reach our team's victory. The Olympic ideal is perhaps the best evidence that endurance, the desire to challenge oneself, and the pursuit of achieving top physical form are age-old endeavors. The events demonstrate that the will to compete in the athletic arena is nearly universal, crossing boundaries of culture and geography to bring together most of the world's nations. It is one of the great celebrations of the human spirit and one of the finest examples of our time of peaceful multi- national competition. I am very proud of Charles' accomplishments and the role that he will play in this international competition. I wish Charles, and all the other athletes who are participating in the Olympics this year, the challenge of vigorous competition. May they again know the exaltation of pushing themselves to their limits and the roar of a crowd that lives vicariously through their triumph.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a resolution that expresses Congress' views on the importance of bringing transparency, accountability, and effectiveness to the World Bank. A necessary step towards achieving these worthwhile objectives is getting the World Bank to carefully and properly examine current programs and projects. The resolution I am introducing today calls for the World Bank to commit to independent performance audits and evaluations of its programs and projects. It outlines some of the steps the World Bank must take to begin a much-needed overhaul. I share the objectives of the World Bank in reducing poverty in developing countries and bolstering their economies. The World Bank seeks a ``World Free of Poverty,'' and we can all recognize this as a good aim. We live in a global society and all have a role in improving the health and well-being of people living in all parts of the world. With this said, I fear that the U.S. is sending its taxpayers' hard- earned dollars to the World Bank with little to show for it. Collectively, U.S. taxpayers represent the single largest contributor of financial resources to the World Bank. Recent reports by the General Accounting Office, the congressionally-mandated and bipartisan International Financial Institution Advisory Commission as well as the testimony of experts testifying before a hearing I held this summer in the Senate Banking Subcommittee on International Trade and Finance, all agree on one thing--we can't even tell with a reasonable level of certainty that funds the World Bank spends on its programs and projects are spent efficiently and as intended to be spent. Additionally, right now Congress is being asked to pony up money for bilateral debt relief to the Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) and as a contribution to the HIPC Initiative for mulilateral debt relief to these poor countries. This allows the multilateral financial institutions to forgive debts and make debt service payments that they are owed by the HIPCs. In part, HIPC Trust Fund monies are used to reimburse the World Bank for debt relief it provides to the HIPCs. We don't want to be sending good money after bad. We don't want to support failed lending and program practices of any international institutions because that would be money wasted. If Congress is to continue supporting the HIPC Initiative, we need to send a message that we want change. This is why it is essential that Congress take a stand for our taxpayers who contribute so much money and a stand for the people around the globe who the Bank's programs and projects are designed to benefit. Adopting this resolution makes this statement. It asks the World Bank to carefully examine its current activities and the way it conducts business. The resolution calls for the World Bank to publicly commit to having an independent third party with no vested interest in the outcome, conduct a thorough review of the Bank's programs and projects through performance audits and a complete performance evaluation that is made public. A complete and open examination of the Bank's practices, its successes and failures, is a win-win for everyone. It's a win for the Bank who will know whether its programs are best targeted to achieve its mission of `A World Free of Poverty,'' a win for member countries who will know whether their monies are being spent as intended, and most importantly, a win for people worldwide whose health and well- being the Bank strives to improve. I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this measure.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise today to commend the remarkable accomplishments of Ruthie Matthes, an Idaho native and a cross-country cyclist, and Stacy Dragila, an Idaho constituent and pole vaulter. At the United States Olympic Track and Field trials in July, Stacy cleared fifteen feet, two and a quarter inches, which broke her personal record by a half-inch and further solidified her qualification to represent the United States at the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games. Stacy, a native of Auburn, California, graduated from Idaho State University and currently resides in Pocatello in my home state of Idaho. It is an honor that she has chosen to live in Idaho and continues to do a lot of her training in Idaho. Stacy has won three of four national championships since the pole vault became an official event in 1997. She currently ranks as the defending world champion and has broken her indoor and outdoor world records a combined eight times since August. All of her competitions have been approached with maximum effort and dedicated preparation. At the U.S. Track and Field Trials, Stacy tried to break her record again, attempting fifteen feet, five inches, three times. She missed each of her three tries, but ended the competition encouraged and gratified nonetheless. ``It helps me to know that I can jump under pressure,'' she said. ``And it's nice to know that I'm attempting 15-5 and I still have things to work on.'' Ruthie Matthes was born in Sun Valley, ID, and lived in neighboring Ketchum throughout most of her formative years. She began cycling as part of her training for alpine hill ski racing. Her decision to cycle full-time was followed by great success. Between 1990 and 1996, Ruthie took home two bronze, two silver, and one gold medal at the World Mountain Bike Championships. She was also the National Cross-Country champion from 1996-1998. Her off-road career now includes three consecutive national cross-country titles. Ruthie deserves as much praise for her athletic prowess as she does for her positive sports ethic. ``You have to stay true to your heart,'' says Matthes. ``Do your very best and enjoy it. Whether you finish first, tenth or last, all of it is an opportunity to learn about yourself.'' These two women, and other devoted athletes, serve as reminders that, through healthy competition, our challengers can inspire us to excel. They unify those of us who watch them through shared pride and passion. Their victories leave our souls soaring high and our feet feeling light. In times of defeat, we are humbled by the fact that there is more work to be done to reach our team's victory. The Olympic ideal is perhaps the best evidence that endurance, the desire to challenge oneself, and the pursuit of achieving top physical form are agelong endeavors. The events demonstrate that the will to compete in the athletic arena is nearly universal, crossing boundaries of culture and geography to bring together most of the world's nations. It is one of the great celebrations of the human spirit and one of the finest examples of our time of peaceful multi-national competition. I am very proud of Ruthie and Stacy's accomplishments and the role that they will play in this international competition. I wish Ruthie, Stacy, and all the other athletes who are participating in the Olympics this year, the challenge of vigorous competition. May they again know the exaltation of pushing themselves to their limits and the roar of a crowd that lives vicariously through their triumph.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise to acknowledge the efforts of the tens of thousands of brave men and women who have fought this year's rash of wildfires throughout the West. These firefighters have weakened the menacing flames that have burned millions of acres of western states, taking lives and devouring farmland, forests and homes. More than six and a half million acres have been destroyed this year. My home state of Idaho, with one and a quarter million acres lost to the flames, has been one of the most harmed. This fire season is the worst we have faced in fifty years. It is clear that without the help of the many people who are fighting these fires, many inhabited areas of the West could become smoldering expanses of charred remains. I offer my sincerest gratitude to everyone participating in the effort to combat the devastating fires. Their work protecting lives, property and the environment is appreciated by all westerners and is crucial to the western economy. Firefighters and fire support teams have been deployed from a range of federal and municipal agencies including county sheriffs departments, local volunteer fire departments, tribes and other local crews throughout the West and the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the National Park Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Help has also been enlisted from the National Guard and battalions from the U.S. Army and the U.S. Marine Corps as well as from trained individuals from Canada, Mexico, Australia and New Zealand. Most of these efforts have been coordinated out of the National Interagency Fire Center, located in Boise, Idaho. Battling fires is dangerous and exhausting work. The air is warm, smoke-filled and flecked with ash. Most of the firefighter's time is spent building firelines, burning out areas, moping up after fires and directly attacking fires. These tasks often entail miles of walking, and hours of tough manual labor, like scraping the ground, chopping and digging, all while wearing uncomfortable protective equipment. The work is so demanding that some firefighters still lose weight even though they have consumed five or six thousand calories a day. Sleep is often inadequate and infrequent. Some teams along the fire line have been known to work 48-hour shifts before calling it a day. Firefighters can almost count on receiving blistered feet and bloodshot eyes. Serious injuries and even death are ever-present risks. This year, sixteen people have suffered fire-related fatalities. Fire support teams also have been working overtime as drivers, equipment operators, paramedics, medical staff, and trouble shooters. It is an enormous management task just to make sure that all of the firefighters are fed and that they receive the equipment, medical attention, and time to sleep. I commend all of the firefighters and support teams for meeting the physical and mental challenges with bravery and steadfast determination. I know I speak for all when I say that our thoughts and prayers are for their safety and we are eager for them to return to their normal lives. The fire season is not yet over as hundreds of fires blaze and threats of more lightening storms that could bring new fires loom. This is indeed a difficult time, although we can take peace of mind from the fact that steady, well-trained hands are working on our behalf to keep the towering flames at bay. Right now, it is important to be grateful for the hard work that has been done to protect us and hopeful for an end to the destruction.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to my esteemed colleague, Paul Coverdell. I join with my colleagues in expressing sadness at his passing. He was a tremendous leader in the Senate and an asset for Georgians and the rest of the country. His years of exemplary public service have included the military, the Peace Corps, the Georgia statehouse, and finally the U.S. Senate. Senator Coverdell was an effective leader and demonstrated many times his unifying influence in the Senate. On a personal level, he was an unpretentious man who had a quiet sense of humor and good mind for details. He was instrumental in helping me make the transition from the U.S. House to the Senate a couple of years ago, and provided insight and advice in everything from how to set up a Senate office to how to make time for my family. There is not a day that goes by that his influence in my Senate career has not been felt. Paul was a friend and a model statesman. He spent a lifetime of service to his country. I will miss him dearly. I extend my prayers to his wife, Nancy, and the rest of his family.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Today the Senate will resume debate on the Agriculture appropriations bill. The Harkin amendment regarding beef is the pending amendment, and it is expected that a vote in relation to that amendment will occur during this morning's session. Senators should also be aware that it is the intention of the bill managers to complete action on this important bill by this afternoon. Therefore, votes can be expected throughout the day. The Senate may also begin consideration of the conference report to accompany the Department of Defense appropriations bill during this evening's session. I thank my colleagues for their attention.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. I thank the Senator. I yield back the floor.

Mr. CRAPO. I want to express my appreciation for the Senator's efforts, and those of the Committee Chairman, Senator Smith, and Subcommittee Ranking Member Senator Graham in working with Senator Baucus and me to reaffirm the eligibility of Private Non-Profit (PNP) irrigation companies for FEMA reimbursement of their facilities in the aftermath of disasters. As he knows, a pending FEMA policy would unfairly single out irrigators among PNPs as ineligible for FEMA assistance. Language in the legislation would ensure that PNP irrigators receive the same treatment as other PNPs in the event of a disaster. This matter is of critical importance to PNP irrigation companies throughout the West. Generally taking on the responsibilities of water utilities elsewhere, irrigation companies provide a valuable service to westerners, including the provision of drinking water, irrigation support, and other critical facilities. Without these services, life in the West could not exist as we know it today. At this time, I would ask that we yield to the distinguished Ranking Member of the full Committee, Senator Baucus. Senator Baucus?

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise to engage the distinguished Subcommittee Chairman in a colloquy.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise today in opposition to an amendment that would make drastic cuts to the timber program. While we have heard a lot of rhetoric regarding the timber program, it is important to understand the context within which these cuts to the timber sale and road construction programs are being considered. Federal timber sales are in a steep and devastating decline. Forest health is increasingly at risk from fire, insects and disease. Both the economic and ecological contexts created by this reduction are undesirable. More than 80,000 jobs have been lost and a 1999 General Accounting Office study reported that over forty million acres of National Forest system lands are at risk of catastrophic wildfire. Another twenty-six million acres are at risk from insects and disease. The recent fires in New Mexico and in other states provide alarming evidence of the impact of increased fuel loads in our forests. Already this year, more than four-and-a-half million acres have burned. Active management is vital to forest health, and it is irresponsible for the federal government to reduce the management options available to local forest managers who best know how to deal with their specific situations. It is confounding that additional cuts in the federal timber sale program are being considered at a time when the industry and those working men and women who depend on it has already been crippled by deep cuts and our forests are suffering from lack of active management that includes responsible timber harvest. Since the early 1990s, the timber program has been reduced by 70 percent and more than 75 percent of the National Forest system is off-limits to timber harvest. The federal timber supply has dropped from twelve billion board-feet harvested to three billion board-feet harvested annually. This amendment would jeopardize 55,000 jobs and $2 billion in employment income, mostly in rural areas. In addition, national forests have 50 percent of our nation's softwood growing stock, which is used for home construction. New reductions in the availability of this supply will hurt housing prices. In my home State of Idaho, small, rural communities continue to suffer devastating reductions in Forest Service Payments-to-states funds from timber sales. In rural Idaho and America, schools are going without needed renovation, county governments are struggling, and basic services are already being jeopardized by steep reductions in federal timber harvest in recent years. This amendment would further reduce payments to rural counties by $7 million and returns to the treasury by $30 million. While some will claim that recreation receipts can replace timber receipts, this simply is not true in Idaho. Eight counties in Idaho derive more than 20 percent of their employment activity from the primary timber industry. There are only two counties in Idaho that have more than a 5 percent dependence on the recreation industry. This amendment is also counterintuitive from an environmental perspective. Active forest management, including thinning and other timber harvest, has widely acknowledge benefits. In fact, most timber sales are currently designed to attain other stewardship objectives. Interestingly enough, it is the sales that have been planned to focus on stewardship objectives that have been criticized as below cost. Timber sales are the most economical, efficient, and effective method available to local resource managers to treat and control many insect epidemics. These harvests contribute greatly to reducing the risk of catastrophic wildfire and promoting diverse stands. Each year, the National Forest system grows 23 billion board-feet. Six billion board-feet die naturally. Only 3 billion board-feet are harvested annually. Tree growth in the National Forest system exceeds harvest by 600 percent. There is no need, environmental or otherwise, to further cripple this important program. I urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment and for the health of rural economies and the forests within the National Forest system.

Mr. CRAPO. I thank the Chairman.

Mr. CRAPO

Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise today to express my strong support for this pro-family, pro-economic growth legislation. It is unfortunate that government continues to burden its citizens with excessive and unfair taxation. Indeed, America's income tax system reduces freedom and economic growth. An embarrassing example of this inequity is the marriage penalty--essentially, a quirk in the income tax code that causes some married couples to be penalized and taxed at higher rates, simply because they marry. The treatment of marriage provides an important example of why we need to support equity in the tax code. Consider that two couples who are exactly the same--except one is married and the other couple is not. A peculiar feature in our tax code is that these two couples may pay different taxes. Simply put, when a man and woman get married, their tax liability can rise and the federal government can take more of the married couple's money. This is a fundamental problem in the tax code. I believe in fairness and simplicity when it comes to taxes. A married couple should not pay more taxes than an unmarried couple with the same total income. This is poor policy. Marriage neutrality is the principle that when two people get married, their total bill should not change. Unfortunately, the U.S. income tax is not marriage neutral. According to the Congressional Budget Office, almost half of all married couples--22 million--suffered from the marriage penalty last year. In my home state of Idaho, 129,710 couples were adversely affected because of this system. These married couples on average paid an extra $1,500 in income tax. Moreover, as women are working hard to achieve salary equity, it is unfortunate that as women approach income levels similar to their husbands, the marriage penalty increasingly kicks in and the federal government simply takes their money back. Under this bill, beginning next year, Congress will restore marriage neutrality to the code. The Marriage Tax Penalty Relief Reconciliation Act will increase the standard deduction for married couples to approximately $8,800. This is twice the basic standard deduction for a single tax filer. The bill will also widen the 15 percent and 28 percent income tax brackets for married couples filing a joint return to twice the size of the corresponding rate brackets of single individuals. This is a commonsense solution to ending any disparity for married couples who find they are paying a penalty. Fortunately for them, the rules under which we are debating the Marriage Tax Penalty Relief Reconciliation Act will also shield senators from excess delay and we will have an up-or-down vote. True to the bill's name, we are here to reconcile an unfair tax provision that is counterproductive to our goal of equity and fairness. Today, we have finally put an end to expensive entitlements and the reckless fiscal behavior that created large deficits in the 1970s, 1980s, and early 1990s. Indeed, the surging U.S. economy has produced an unprecedented tidal wave of federal tax receipts. This year, the country will see a $76 billion dollar surplus--over the next ten years the non-social security surplus is estimated at $1.9 trillion. This raises the question: when will the government start returning money to the people? With these surpluses there is no doubt that there is room for marriage tax relief and additional debt reduction. Therefore, we should seize this opportunity to return these surplus dollars, before the bureaucrats in town start spending them. If we do not, an opportunity to restore horizontal equity to the tax code will be lost, because surpluses--like we have today--will certainly invite an irresponsible flurry of new spending. Americans have historically and consistently expressed their discontent for excessive and unfair taxation. I have stacks of letters in my office from honest and hard-working Idahoans who rightfully want to know where their tax cut is. Let us take this opportunity to return something to those American families who are married and working to support families and loved ones. Let us make good on our constituent promise by voting to eliminate the marriage tax penalty and let us give the President an opportunity to honor his State of the Union promise by signing this bill. The federal tax code remains intrusive, overly complicated, and excessively burdensome. As part of my effort to bring tax relief to the American people, I have co-sponsored or voted for legislation to reduce the death tax, gas tax, beer tax, and telephone excise tax. Today, we have an opportunity to vote for a bill that I hope will have broad bipartisan support. Senators should be mindful of the opportunity to provide needed relief to married couples. Death and taxes are certainties in life. Let us vote to ensure that fairness is too. I urge my colleagues to support repeal of the marriage tax penalty. It is the right thing to do.